norml06 - Page 2

Page 2 Previous , Next , Original Image
Return to Index

 No. 92--,1179 Rescheduling to Schedule II would permit doctors to pre-
 scribe marijuana for therapeutic purposes. Petitioners' cen-
 DRUa POLICY FOUNDATION AND TIlE NATIONAL tral claim is that the Administrator's order rests on an
 ORGANIZATION FOR THE RgFORM OF M*R_au._a LAws, unreasonable interpretation of the statute. Because our pre-
 PETITIONERS 'vqOUS disposition of this matter in Alliance for Cannabis
 Therapeutics w DEA, 930 F.2d 936 (D.C. Cir, 1991) ("ACT")
 v. constitutes the law of the case, we decline to reconsider this
 claim, We also find that the Administrator satisfied ACT's
 DRu˘ ENPORCEMENT ADM1NIS'rIiATION. mandate on remand and that petitioners' other claims lack
 ReSeONDeNT merit.
 1. BaCl/C_ROUND
 Petition, s for Review of an Order of the A. Statutory Scheme
 Drug Enforcement Administration The Controlled Substances Act ("CSA") places hazardous
 drugs in five categories, or schedules which impose varying
 :! restrictions on access to the drugs. See 21 U.S.C. § 812
 (1988). Mar_iuana is assigned by statute to Schedule I, the
 Steven K. Davi&on argued the cause for petitioners. Wit,h most restrictive of these. See id Schedule I drugs may be
 him on the briefs were Amy W. Lustig and Kevin B. Zecse. obt. ained and used lawfully only' by doctors who submit a
 Thom a,_ C Collier, J_: entered an appearatme for petitioner detailed research protocol for approval by the Food and Drug
 Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics and intervenors in No. Administration and who agree to abide by strict record-
 92-11138. keeping and storage rules. See 21 C.F.R. §§ 1301.33,
 Lena D. MiteheK Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, 1301.42.
 argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief was The CSA allows the Attorney General to reschedule a drug
 John C Keeney, Acting Assistant Attorney General. E ur,_i if he finds that it does not meet the criteria for the schedule
 L. Choi entered an appearance for respondent, to which it has been assigned. 21 U.S.C. § 811(a). The
 Stea_e'n K. Davidson. and Amy W. L_stig were also on the Attmmey General has delegated this authority to the Admin-
 brief for intervenors, istrator. See 28 C_F.R. § 0.100(b). In reseheduling a drug,
 the Administrator must consider, inter asia, "[slcientifie evi-
 Before M_KV& Ch_eY Judge, and BVCRIEY and (,_r_.._m_ deuce of [the drug's] pharmacological effect, if known, arid
 Circuit Ju@cs. "[tlhe state of current scientific knowledge regarding the
 Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge BucKLm'. : drug or other _ubs_nee in determining whether to resched-
 ute the drug. 21 U.S.C. § 811(e)(2), (a).
 BUCKLr. Y, Cbvuit Jiadge: The Alliance for Cannabis Thera-
 peutics, the Drug Po!ky Foundation, and the Nations! Orga° A drug is placed in Schedule I if (1) it "has a high potentia!
 nization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws petition for review for abuse," (2) it has "no currently azcepted medical u_se in
 of a final order of the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement treatment in the United States," and (3) "[tlhere is a lack of
 Administration declining to reschedule marijuana fl'om Scbed- accepted safety for use of the drug ... under medical super-
 ule I to Schedule II of the Controlled Substances Act. vision." 21 U.S.C. § 812(b)(1) (1988) (emphasis added). The

Previous , Next , Return to Index